In a May 2003 interview with JournalismJobs.com, Weekley Standard senior writer Matt Labash was asked, "Why have conservative media outlets like The Weekly Standard and Fox News Channel become more popular in the past few years?". In response he said:

Because they feed the rage. We bring the pain to the liberal media. I say that mockingly, but it's true somewhat. We come with a strong point of view and people like point of view journalism. While all these hand-wringing Freedom Forum types talk about objectivity, the conservative media likes to rap the liberal media on the knuckles for not being objective. We've created this cottage industry in which it pays to be un-objective. It pays to be subjective as much as possible. It's a great way to have your cake and eat it too. Criticize other people for not being objective. Be as subjective as you want. It's a great little racket. I'm glad we found it actually. [3]

Political influence

The Weekly Standard states on its website that "more than 65,000 politically active Americans nationwide receive the magazine each week". [4] Dwarfed by its primary competitor, the conservative National Review (circulation 155,000), the Weekly Standard nonetheless influences conservatives and neoconservatives alike through a massive Internet presence. [5] On its website, the Weekly Standard states that "before breakfast on Mondays, 4,000 requested copies of The Standard are delivered – also by hand - to every Member of Congress, to Congressional committees, and to federal agencies throughout the city." [6]

In 2003 William Kristol explained that "we have a funny relationship with the top tier of the administration. They very much keep us at arm's length, but Dick Cheney does send over someone to pick up 30 copies of the magazine every Monday." [7]

"Reader for reader, it may be the most influential publication in America. Their circulation may be small but they are not interested in speaking to the great unwashed. The magazine speaks directly to and for power. Anybody who wants to know what this administration is thinking and what they plan to do has to read this magazine." [8]

Policy positions

In 1997, the Weekly Standard became one of the first publications to publicly call for regime change in Iraq.

Funding

Writing in the American Conservative, Scott McConnell, stated that when the Weekly Standard started up in 1995, it did so "thanks to a $3 million annual subsidy from Rupert Murdoch". (McConnell does not indicate what the source of the subsidy estimate is). [10]

In 2003 the New York Times reported that "executives said The Weekly Standard was losing a little more than a million dollars a year". [11]